Cargando…
The OSCAR-IB Consensus Criteria for Retinal OCT Quality Assessment
BACKGROUND: Retinal optical coherence tomography (OCT) is an imaging biomarker for neurodegeneration in multiple sclerosis (MS). In order to become validated as an outcome measure in multicenter studies, reliable quality control (QC) criteria with high inter-rater agreement are required. METHODS/PRI...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Public Library of Science
2012
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3334941/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22536333 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0034823 |
_version_ | 1782230711448633344 |
---|---|
author | Tewarie, Prejaas Balk, Lisanne Costello, Fiona Green, Ari Martin, Roland Schippling, Sven Petzold, Axel |
author_facet | Tewarie, Prejaas Balk, Lisanne Costello, Fiona Green, Ari Martin, Roland Schippling, Sven Petzold, Axel |
author_sort | Tewarie, Prejaas |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Retinal optical coherence tomography (OCT) is an imaging biomarker for neurodegeneration in multiple sclerosis (MS). In order to become validated as an outcome measure in multicenter studies, reliable quality control (QC) criteria with high inter-rater agreement are required. METHODS/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: A prospective multicentre study on developing consensus QC criteria for retinal OCT in MS: (1) a literature review on OCT QC criteria; (2) application of these QC criteria to a training set of 101 retinal OCT scans from patients with MS; (3) kappa statistics for inter-rater agreement; (4) identification reasons for inter-rater disagreement; (5) development of new consensus QC criteria; (6) testing of the new QC criteria on the training set and (7) prospective validation on a new set of 159 OCT scans from patients with MS. The inter-rater agreement for acceptable scans among OCT readers (n = 3) was moderate (kappa 0·45) based on the non-validated QC criteria which were entirely based on the ophthalmological literature. A new set of QC criteria was developed based on recognition of: (O) obvious problems, (S) poor signal strength, (C) centration of scan, (A) algorithm failure, (R) retinal pathology other than MS related, (I) illumination and (B) beam placement. Adhering to these OSCAR-IB QC criteria increased the inter-rater agreement to kappa from moderate to substantial (0.61 training set and 0.61 prospective validation). CONCLUSIONS: This study presents the first validated consensus QC criteria for retinal OCT reading in MS. The high inter-rater agreement suggests the OSCAR-IB QC criteria to be considered in the context of multicentre studies and trials in MS. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-3334941 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2012 |
publisher | Public Library of Science |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-33349412012-04-25 The OSCAR-IB Consensus Criteria for Retinal OCT Quality Assessment Tewarie, Prejaas Balk, Lisanne Costello, Fiona Green, Ari Martin, Roland Schippling, Sven Petzold, Axel PLoS One Research Article BACKGROUND: Retinal optical coherence tomography (OCT) is an imaging biomarker for neurodegeneration in multiple sclerosis (MS). In order to become validated as an outcome measure in multicenter studies, reliable quality control (QC) criteria with high inter-rater agreement are required. METHODS/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: A prospective multicentre study on developing consensus QC criteria for retinal OCT in MS: (1) a literature review on OCT QC criteria; (2) application of these QC criteria to a training set of 101 retinal OCT scans from patients with MS; (3) kappa statistics for inter-rater agreement; (4) identification reasons for inter-rater disagreement; (5) development of new consensus QC criteria; (6) testing of the new QC criteria on the training set and (7) prospective validation on a new set of 159 OCT scans from patients with MS. The inter-rater agreement for acceptable scans among OCT readers (n = 3) was moderate (kappa 0·45) based on the non-validated QC criteria which were entirely based on the ophthalmological literature. A new set of QC criteria was developed based on recognition of: (O) obvious problems, (S) poor signal strength, (C) centration of scan, (A) algorithm failure, (R) retinal pathology other than MS related, (I) illumination and (B) beam placement. Adhering to these OSCAR-IB QC criteria increased the inter-rater agreement to kappa from moderate to substantial (0.61 training set and 0.61 prospective validation). CONCLUSIONS: This study presents the first validated consensus QC criteria for retinal OCT reading in MS. The high inter-rater agreement suggests the OSCAR-IB QC criteria to be considered in the context of multicentre studies and trials in MS. Public Library of Science 2012-04-19 /pmc/articles/PMC3334941/ /pubmed/22536333 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0034823 Text en Tewarie et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are properly credited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Tewarie, Prejaas Balk, Lisanne Costello, Fiona Green, Ari Martin, Roland Schippling, Sven Petzold, Axel The OSCAR-IB Consensus Criteria for Retinal OCT Quality Assessment |
title | The OSCAR-IB Consensus Criteria for Retinal OCT Quality Assessment |
title_full | The OSCAR-IB Consensus Criteria for Retinal OCT Quality Assessment |
title_fullStr | The OSCAR-IB Consensus Criteria for Retinal OCT Quality Assessment |
title_full_unstemmed | The OSCAR-IB Consensus Criteria for Retinal OCT Quality Assessment |
title_short | The OSCAR-IB Consensus Criteria for Retinal OCT Quality Assessment |
title_sort | oscar-ib consensus criteria for retinal oct quality assessment |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3334941/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22536333 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0034823 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT tewarieprejaas theoscaribconsensuscriteriaforretinaloctqualityassessment AT balklisanne theoscaribconsensuscriteriaforretinaloctqualityassessment AT costellofiona theoscaribconsensuscriteriaforretinaloctqualityassessment AT greenari theoscaribconsensuscriteriaforretinaloctqualityassessment AT martinroland theoscaribconsensuscriteriaforretinaloctqualityassessment AT schipplingsven theoscaribconsensuscriteriaforretinaloctqualityassessment AT petzoldaxel theoscaribconsensuscriteriaforretinaloctqualityassessment AT tewarieprejaas oscaribconsensuscriteriaforretinaloctqualityassessment AT balklisanne oscaribconsensuscriteriaforretinaloctqualityassessment AT costellofiona oscaribconsensuscriteriaforretinaloctqualityassessment AT greenari oscaribconsensuscriteriaforretinaloctqualityassessment AT martinroland oscaribconsensuscriteriaforretinaloctqualityassessment AT schipplingsven oscaribconsensuscriteriaforretinaloctqualityassessment AT petzoldaxel oscaribconsensuscriteriaforretinaloctqualityassessment |